U.S. welcomes Russia's ban on S-300 missile sales to Iran

reply to post by SLAYER69


Here you go Slayer, the war has begun, Propaganda/Economic/Futuristics BS:

Stuxnet Computer Worm Targets Iranian Infrastructure

reply to post by oozyism



It could be anybody the US, Russia, India, China or a pimply faced Iranian teen with that has issues with his Government.

Originally posted by oozyism

The creation of that environment, is related to the heavy propaganda they are pushing against Iran. That has also failed, because Iran is countering propaganda with propaganda, hence the human rights violation of the Virginia women who is being executed for adultery. At least that is how propaganda works

[sarcasm intended on the adultery part lol]

Hey Oozy, let's talk about propaganda, shall we?

As a public service announcement, I hereby give you a link to a story on the execution you mention, attempting, and miserably failing, to link it somehow to stonings for adultery in Iran. The public service portion is an attempt to get you to stop telling bald faced lies, and damaging your credibility any further. Without further delay, here's the link:

Teresa Lewis Executed

Now, riddle me this, Oozy. I've asked you before, when you attempt to tell this very lie, how does an execution for murder, by lethal injection, compare at all to beating a woman to death with rocks for committing "adultery" against a husband who is long dead already?

You never answered last time I asked, and I'm wondering just what sort of justification you can pull out of your arse for this comparison you attempt to draw?

reply to post by nenothtu


Don't embarrass yourself, I'll give you your answer then you can keep blabbering, you have already failed

Oozy. I've asked you before, when you attempt to tell this very lie, how does an execution for murder, by lethal injection, compare at all to beating a woman to death with rocks for committing "adultery" against a husband who is long dead already?

She Virginia women didn't murder anyone, two men, one was her lover, murdered her husband. The Iranian women didn't murder anyone, another man, her lover, murdered her husband. See the similarities? Counter propaganda with propaganda Neno hahaha, they were both sentenced to death for adultery

You never answered last time I asked, and I'm wondering just what sort of justification you can pull out of your arse for this comparison you attempt to draw?

And by the way, she is not getting stoned

Embarrassing..

Bye

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Don't embarrass yourself, I'll give you your answer then you can keep blabbering, you have already failed

I'm not easily embarrassed, by myself or anyone else - you included. Well, ESPECIALLY you.

Oozy. I've asked you before, when you attempt to tell this very lie, how does an execution for murder, by lethal injection, compare at all to beating a woman to death with rocks for committing "adultery" against a husband who is long dead already?

She Virginia women didn't murder anyone, two men, one was her lover, murdered her husband. The Iranian women didn't murder anyone, another man, her lover, murdered her husband. See the similarities? Counter propaganda with propaganda Neno hahaha, they were both sentenced to death for adultery

"counter propaganda with propaganda". Interesting. If you're insinuating that my posting of that link was "propaganda" to counter YOUR propaganda, then that constitutes an admission that your statement IS propaganda.

Interesting. EMBARRASSINGLY interesting...

Now, the Virginia woman was NOT sentenced for adultery. She was sentenced for murder. Specifically, for her part in a murder plot intended to collect 250,000 dollars in insurance money on her deceased husband, who, of course, had to be deceased before she could collect. Again, she was sentenced NOT for adultery, but rather for murder. I suppose I can pull and post the court records should that become necessary... The Iranian woman was sentenced for "adultery" committed 3 years AFTER her husband died. Your comparison is not only "in error", it is INTENTIONALLY in error. That's called a "lie" where I come from. Your continued attempt to defend an exposed lie constitutes piss-poor propaganda.

You never answered last time I asked, and I'm wondering just what sort of justification you can pull out of your arse for this comparison you attempt to draw?

Well, thanks for attempting an answer finally, even if it WAS a poor attempt. At least it was an answer.

And by the way, she is not getting stoned

Yeah. I wonder WHY that is? Heat got a little warm in the kitchen, I reckon. Sure as hell wasn't out of the goodness of the Ayatollah's hearts.

Embarrassing..

Bye

My thoughts exactly.

reply to post by nenothtu

Now, the Virginia woman was NOT sentenced for adultery. She was sentenced for murder. Specifically, for her part in a murder plot intended to collect 250,000 dollars in insurance money on her deceased husband, who, of course, had to be deceased before she could collect. Again, she was sentenced NOT for adultery, but rather for murder. I suppose I can pull and post the court records should that become necessary... The Iranian woman was sentenced for "adultery" committed 3 years AFTER her husband died. Your comparison is not only "in error", it is INTENTIONALLY in error. That's called a "lie" where I come from. Your continued attempt to defend an exposed lie constitutes piss-poor propaganda.

Ohh you are deep

Based on the same propaganda tactics the US uses against Iran, she was sentenced to death by lethal injection due to adultery. See how propaganda works>? Then I'll continue and say that what ever the US is saying is BS, she is innocent, she had nothing to do with her husband's murder, it was a forced confession Remember the Iranian women's confession

Counter propaganda with propaganda, get it now, or do we need another lecture in regards to the mentally retarded lady who is being executed for adultery Think for a second, why wasn't the men sentenced to death? Ohh wait, women's right, ahh another piece of propaganda I can slap left and right

reply to post by oozyism


*sigh* I reckon I WILL have to post the court records, eh?

She was sentenced and executed for MURDER, not adultery - especially not adultery against a husband who was 3 years in his grave. Adultery isn't a capital offense here - or in any other civilized country that I'm aware of.

Without having reviewed all the particulars of the case, I'm gonna shoot from the hip and say that her death sentence was due to aggravating factors - like the insurance rationale for killing him, and the fact that she's the one who initiated the murder scheme. Might be different, I'll let you know after a review if that's really necessary.

And yeah, I see how propaganda works. I was educated in that long ago, and you can't really add anything to that education - you aren't very good at it, despite your valiant efforts.

BTW, she's not "being executed", she has BEEN executed.

But yeah, if you feel the need to "lecture" me on propaganda, go for it. I'd prefer you bring something new into the mix, though, because the methods you've been using are way too easy to knock down.

It just ain't sporting.

reply to post by nenothtu


But I'm talking about propaganda, see how easily your back faces the wall, and you are cornered?

As I said previously, how do you know they are not lying, and how do you know they haven't forced her to confess?

Sakinah also confessed?

Iran is trying to change, and the judiciary of Iran has already written a legislation to scrap the punishment of stoning to death. What has the US done?

See how easy it is to use propaganda to counter propaganda and give you a headache?

It works..

Why didn't you comment on the fact that she was a female, and that is why she was executed, and the two men who shot her husband was sentenced to life in prison.

This is women's right + human rights issue. In terms of propaganda ofcours lol

Ahh man, I feel so free, finally I'm not the one with my back against the wall
Think about this the, why was

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by hippomchippo

 

I think Russia realizes that there is more at stake here than a few billion in arms sales.
The global community is getting pretty tired of Iran's shell game BS.

It still surprises me that Russia would allow the U.S this kind of move in such a strategic region like the middle east.

Russia has cancelled this S300 missile deal I think as more of a gesture of goddwill towards the West and NATO than anything else. I think Russia knows that in the long term if they want to have a successful country/economy/society they will need to lean more towards US rather than risk being pushed back towards THEM, if you know what I mean. This has effectively removed any "fear" that Russia may side withIran in response to a Western attack.

Why Russia Cancelled S300 deal.

This article by General ivashov is of crucial importance. It suggests that Russia has sided with the US-NATO-Israel military alliance. By freezing its military cooperation agreements with Tehran pertaining to Iran's air defense system, Moscow has de facto given the green light to the Pentagon. Without the S-300 air defense system including Russian technical support, Iran is a "sitting duck". This compliance of Moscow to US demands is a precondition for an all out war directed against Iran. Moscow has no doubt also intimated that it would not intervene if an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities were to be launched.

On the whole, Serdyukov's military reform – the structural overhaul, the introduction of the brigade system, the acquisitions of Israeli and NATO weapons, joint Russia-West exercises in the US and in Europe, and the tide of military college closures – lead watchers to conclude that the broader plan behind it is to build what still remains of Russia's army and navy into the US and NATO expedition corps.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by nenothtu

 

But I'm talking about propaganda, see how easily your back faces the wall, and you are cornered?

What gives you the impression that my "back is to the wall", or that I'm "cornered"? It's a very strange fantasy world you live in...

As I said previously, how do you know they are not lying, and how do you know they haven't forced her to confess?

"They", who is "they"? What sort of forced confession are you insinuating? An Iranian rubber hose, or what?

Sakinah also confessed?

To murder? Try to stay focused, grasshopper.

Iran is trying to change, and the judiciary of Iran has already written a legislation to scrap the punishment of stoning to death. What has the US done?

Executed a murderess. We never HAVE gone in for barbaric things like beating women to death with rocks, so we have no need to step up into the 12th century from the 7th with NEW legislation.

See how easy it is to use propaganda to counter propaganda and give you a headache?

It works..

Nope, not seeing it. Point it out. Maybe then my head will hurt. Right now, all I see is you going in circles, trying to make me dizzy.

Why didn't you comment on the fact that she was a female, and that is why she was executed, and the two men who shot her husband was sentenced to life in prison.

Yeah, I did address that, but since you missed it, I'll have to go into more detail I suppose.

What does her gender have to do with it? You think women can't kill? You've got a lot of learning to do if that's what you think. Of the two shooters who shot hr husband and her stepson (can't leave him out - he was murdered too...), one (the primary) died by suicide in prison in 2006 - dead already. The other is in prison for life. The woman got death because it was HER idea, she set everything up, and she is the one who would have benefitted from the aggravating factors involved. There's more to a murder than just twitching a trigger.

This is women's right + human rights issue. In terms of propaganda ofcours lol

Women's rights - no. I don't recognize the right of a woman to commit murder any more than I recognize the right of a man to commit murder. Therefore, equal rights have been upheld in this case.

Human rights? Of course. Mr Lewis and his son had a human right not to be murdered in their sleep in their own house. Their human rights were violated with extreme prejudice, and justice has been served as far as is possible in the case.

Ahh man, I feel so free, finally I'm not the one with my back against the wall
Think about this the, why was

That's only because you don't seem to know it when you are bested.

as usual.

reply to post by nenothtu


Sorry Neno, there is no discussion here.

1. She was mentally retarded.
2. She was a women (propaganda)
3. She didn't shoot anyone
4. Her husband was killed by her lover.
5. She confessed to helping with murder
6. Her confession was forced (propaganda)
7. Her lover professed that he tricked her
8. She is mentally retarded
9. Her lover got life sentence
10. She got the death penalty
Conclusion1. US executes retards, just like Nazi Germany (propaganda)
Conclusion2. US executes women for adultery (propaganda)
Conclusion4. US executes women for helping with her husband's murder
Conclusion5. US executes women for murder, but not men (propaganda)
Conclusion6. Your conclusion
,,,,,

I think you get my point, if you still didn't, you are very smart

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Sorry Neno, there is no discussion here.

1. She was mentally retarded. - Factually incorrect. She was mentally disturbed, NOT retarded.
2. She was a women (propaganda) - Irrelevant, due to equality under the law.
3. She didn't shoot anyone - Irrelevant whether or not she actually pulled the trigger. She hatched the plan, set it all up, and actively executed it. Without hr instrumentality, it could not have happened.
4. Her husband was killed by her lover. - Relationship irrelevant. The fact that he was murdered, period, IS relevant.
5. She confessed to helping with murder - Yup, and murder is illegal here, with the potential to carry the death penalty if circumstances are aggravated enough, which in this case they were.
6. Her confession was forced (propaganda) - If you have objective proof of that statement, bring it forth. Otherwise, you are only speaking from your sphincter.
7. Her lover professed that he tricked her - According to her defense attorney. The "tricking" was found as fact to go quite the other way.
8. She is mentally retarded - Already addressed in point #1 above.
9. Her lover got life sentence - Yup, and is dead already.
10. She got the death penalty - Yup.See #5 for explanation.
Conclusion1. US executes retards, just like Nazi Germany (propaganda) - Factually incorrect, see points #1 and #5 above.
Conclusion2. US executes women for adultery (propaganda) - Bald faced, intentional, LIE, Addressed several times in this exchange already. The sentence was for murder, NOT adultery.
Conclusion4. US executes women for helping with her husband's murder - Yup. See #5 and #10.
Conclusion5. US executes women for murder, but not men (propaganda) - Factually incorrect. This is the first woman executed in Virginia since 1912, and the first in the US since 2005. All the other executions for murder have been men.
Conclusion6. Your conclusion - Huh?

,,,,,

I think you get my point, if you still didn't, you are very smart

I reckon I'll just have to let that stand as it is....

Her confession was forced (propaganda) - If you have objective proof of that statement, bring it forth. Otherwise, you are only speaking from your sphincter.

ahhhh hahaha, sorry, but that's priceless.

This woman is/was not mentally retarded in any way, shape or form. The governor knew it, the supreme court knew it, why do you think she was denied clemency.

What we have is an idiotic, self-absorbed piece of white trash who knowingly formulated a plot to have her own child and husband murdered. Now I know that capital punishment may seem barbaric, but I can tell you that I won't lose a wink of sleep knowing this mentally deranged woman is dead.

BUT, Not on topic.

LADIES and gentlemen remember?
Topic?


Thanks...

Originally posted by SLAYER69

BUT, Not on topic.

LADIES and gentlemen remember?
Topic?


Thanks...

I meant to address that very thing in the post, and got lost in the heat of the battle. Sorry 'bout that. Oozy is trying to defend a crazy regime, who are hard after some sub-standard missiles, by sidetracking into social issues which only illustrate the barbarity of the regime in question - their inability to sanely employ said missiles. What I'm getting from his argument is that rocks are more their speed than missiles.

But, dammit, he dragged me off into the brush again, didn't he?

I didn't read the full article but what is US giving, or not doing, to Russia?????